Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : The Environmentalist Thread -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: neolib who wrote (23533)	12/25/2008 9:39:23 PM
From: Maurice Winn	1 Recommendation Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 36917

Neo, when people change the environment for plants from terrible conditions, such as very low CO2 levels, to better conditions, such as more CO2, the plants breathe a sigh of relief, literally: <Yes, plants evolve to fit their environment. When people change the environment rapidly, it can cause problems.> Another example of changing the environment would be redirecting part of a river to desert irrigation. Plants need water as you know, so plants would be able to grow where nothing could before. It isn't necessarily bad because people do it, contrary to your expectations. Yes, destructive changes of the environment, such as spraying lead around, or drying up a river, or filling the air with sulphur oxides or CFCs can indeed be harmful, but CO2 is not a pollutant as is commonly claimed by environmental fanatics. No plants suffer as a result of increasing CO2 from 280 to 380 ppm. They LIKE CO2, though some will benefit more than others, so some will suffer in the competition as a result [and die] as the tougher ones take over from those who can survive best in very low CO2. Mqurice